Lomax hires lawyers against Parramatta

 31053260657?profile=RESIZE_710x


Zac Lomax has reportedly engaged a lawyer in an attempt to secure an unconditional release from the Parramatta Eels so he can join the Melbourne Storm.

It’s believed his legal team will argue that the situation is unfair and that their client now simply wants to play rugby league — despite the fact that only weeks ago he indicated he didn’t want to play at all. Chasing money often comes with consequences.

It’s unclear which lawyer he has approached, but you can expect plenty complaints and noise to follow. 

For mine Lomax fought against the Parramatta club in a bid to get out of the contract he chose to sign. This left the Eels in a no win situation, as  if we had forced Lomax to play against his will, that usually doesn't end well.  But Lomax left the club in a predicament, with more cap dollars with minimal recruitment opportunities available in his position.  We were banking on him to fulfil his 4 year deal.

 We made the commitment,  he broke the commitment.   Either we get a like for like player from the Storm or its no deal Eddie.

You need to be a member of 1Eyed Eel to add comments!

Join 1Eyed Eel

Votes: 0
Email me when people reply –

Replies

  • Probably been answered, what happens if he says he wants to come back and we do not have the cap space? Is there an issue?

    • Depends on the actual wording in the release agreement but wasn't he released from his contract on the condition that he didn't play with an NRL team until his original contract term was up? 

      Given he now has no contract with us we surely aren't obligated to take him back. 

      • Well it's weird as he has a contract and also doesn't? I guess the wording is rights. It's like NFL, when Tampa signed Brady, Gronk came out of retirement but Tampa had to trade a 4th round pick to New England as they had his rights.

        i guess Parra can argue there is no contract now but he signed a stat dec claiming to not play in the NRL with another team until the completion of the deal he originally had. He doesn't have much to stand on unless we are incompetent in our wording of contracts and left a loop hole.

        Maybe MON added a PO for him to exit the agreement after a year.

    • He's not signed to parramatta anymore. The old contract was torn up conditionally.

      • As I said in 2nd paragraph.

  • I will say, it is a pleasant change seeing the NRL community back us on this. 

  • Lol, if being unfair was a valid legal argument courts would be much more fun.

    If Lomax signed to terms and those terms are not illegal, then he is cooked unless we agree to mutually dissolve those terms. I can't see any reason why we would do that unless the Storm were willing to advantage the Eels in such a way that we couldn't refuse...and I don't see anything they'd be willing to do that would satisfy that criteria.

    Lomax is lucky he is great at sports because I don't think he's the sharpest.

    • Thick as pigshit with cornflour is a phrase that comes to mind.

    • This !!!!!

This reply was deleted.

More stuff to read

Michael W. replied to Roy tannous's discussion Rnd 1 team vs storm
"Lomax will line up against Fox, and Fox will burn him. Unless they play him in the centres."
2 hours ago
Michael W. replied to Roy tannous's discussion Rnd 1 team vs storm
"Don't need Blore, we have an abundance of edge players."
2 hours ago
Michael W. replied to Roy tannous's discussion Rnd 1 team vs storm
"He will start with Williams and Tuilagi in the second row, then Williams will go to the middle and Kk will go to the left edge. He won't go with Williams and KK to start."
2 hours ago
Clintorian replied to Roy tannous's discussion Rnd 1 team vs storm
"I was thinking JDB would start at 13 and either Walker would replace him, or he'd move to prop when Junior needed a rest. He can hold the defence in the middle without Junior which has been a weakness. Then he'd come back on wherever we'd need him…"
3 hours ago
More…